I am not sure how Joseph Pearce is going to squeeze "Defender of the Faith" out of this quotation, published in 2002, in which Cardinal Ratzinger tries to explain why we Catholics call God "Father"?
Here is the quotation from Cardinal Ratzinger published in the book, God and the World: A Conversation with Peter Seewald published by Ignatius Press. Try to squeeze the Catholic Faith out of an answer that should have been quite simple. The Father is "Father"because He has begotten the Son in all eternity. No? By the way, this was the quotation that really settled my mind, when I read it for the first time in 2006, then throwing the book across the room, that there was no way this man was a Catholic. Now to the quotation from pp. 102-103: When asked about why Catholics speak of God as "Father" and after first giving a his interviewer a evasive answer, his interviewer Peter Seewald, in seeming confusion about his answer, asks, "Do you know?" To this, Ratzinger gives the answer, "I would in the first place hold on to the fact that the word 'Father' naturally remains an image [sic]. It remains true that God is neither male or female, but is simply God. Yet at the same time we are talking about an image that was given to us authentically by Christ himself, as an expression to me in prayer, and is thus non-exchangeable [that's nice of you!]: an image in which he tried to convey to us something concerning the way God sees things [what does this have to do with giving an account of how God IS?]. But why [is God called Father]? At the moment [2000? No one told us about this] we are in a new phase of reflection [Kant. Everything in religions comes down to a mere matter of cognitive 'reflection'] on this question, but I think that in the end we cannot provide an answer [Joe Pearce, have Tolkien call his office!] What we can say is perhaps two things. First, in the religions that existed in the world all around Israel, there were god-couples [hence the flying book], with a god and a goddess. Monotheism, in contrast to that, excluded the idea of a god-couple and, instead of that, regarded mankind, or alternatively Israel, as the chosen partner, the bride, in relation to God....In that way, the female image is given forever to Israel, and likewise to the Church, and finally it is made personal and concrete yet again, in a special way, in Mary.
The second point is that wherever images of the mother-goddess has been used in worship, they have so altered people's thinking about creation that creation has been transformed into emanation and birth....The God who is portrayed in the image of the Father, on the contrary, makes things by means of the Word --- and that is the point at which the specific distinction between the act of creation and the creature becomes quite clear."
As Archbishop Lefebvre said about the man he was negotiating with way back 40 years ago, "He is not a Catholic."